In a trial relating to historic offences of indecent assault, the judge had rightly allowed a witness, who had witnessed the alleged offences, to give evidence that she has also been inappropriately sexually touched by the appellant. The judge correctly directed the jury that her evidence did not go to propensity, but that it was potentially relevant to an important matter in issue.
A conviction on 15 historic counts of indecent assault was safe despite some unsatisfactory features of the judge’s summing up. The total sentence of fifteen years’ imprisonment was reduced to eight years, to take account of the offender’s advanced age and poor health.
A total sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment together with an extended licence period of one year was appropriate for historic sex offences committed by a 71-year-old man against his three step-grandchildren.
A sentence of 12 years’ imprisonment imposed following guilty pleas to 24 charges of indecent assault on a male, two charges of indecency with a child under 14, one charge of indecent assault on a female under 13 and two charges of perjury, was increased to 18 years where the offender, a priest and former social worker, had committed a catalogue of offences against 11 victims over decades and where his behaviour resulted in one victim giving evidence at two trials.
A sentence of 21 months’ imprisonment imposed on a teacher following his conviction for six counts of engaging in sexual activity while in a position of trust was not excessive where he had groomed a 16-year old pupil and, on six separate occasions, engineered time alone with her in a classroom. Although some of the lasting harm suffered by the complainant might have been attributable to the full consensual relationship which developed after she left school, that relationship arose directly from the teacher’s serious criminality while she was in his care at school.